NASA NTRSDate not supplied
We compare different methods for collecting ultra-high resolution topography data within an analog planetary, human landing site scale area. Our aim is to investigate the cost and benefits of different 3D terrain mapping techniques, their associated data collection methods, and how their different specifications (e.g., range, spatial resolution, scanning-time, mobility, operating constraints, GPS-Denied operation, etc.) might be applied to landing-site characterization and mission operations. We compare 3D terrain data collected during a field campaign in November 2021 from an outcrop at Kilbourne Hole in southern New Mexico using different Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) sensors on the ground and stereo-derived 3D data from framing cameras mounted on small uncrewed aerial systems (sUAS).Our foci for this experiment are ground-based, surveying, and autonomous vehicle-type 3D scanning sensors that might be used for planetary surface exploration from landed assets (e.g., lander, rover, astronaut-mounted sensors, decent imaging, hoppers, or drones).[e.g. 1]This test is not meant to benchmark these scanners against one another, nor provide a recommendation for a specific make or model. Rather, our goal is to quantify time, effort, resolution, and operational trade-offs that are important for selecting a topographic instrument/methodology for a given scope of terrain characterization. Our results indicate that each technique is capable of exceptional quality terrain characterization for planetary exploration and scientific inquiry, but we hypothesize the appropriate technique is highly dependent on the scope of operational specifications and science requirements.